Recently Nick Palmer asked what's not to like about rail nationalisation. After all, the part of the operation that's in state hands already is doing SO WELL....
I read it earlier to much WTFery. He's spot on here.
"According to the figures, one council — Bexley in Kent — spent more than £58,000 a week per child — £3 million each — on specialist privately run homes last year."
Surely this merits some further detail. How do you spend £58,000 a week? I mean, even if they were running an entire home (and I note to my satisfaction that many fewer home now operate and that although poor the adoption and I think foster rates are rising) for just one child I still don't see how you end up paying £3m a year.
My guess would be that these children had substantial special needs and that these costs include the costs of the various therapists and special facilities that they require. I have seen similar costs for some severely damaged children placed in residential care.
Good on Gove, though. This is an area of neglect that society should be ashamed of and shedding light on it will help.
I read it earlier to much WTFery. He's spot on here.
"According to the figures, one council — Bexley in Kent — spent more than £58,000 a week per child — £3 million each — on specialist privately run homes last year."
Surely this merits some further detail. How do you spend £58,000 a week? I mean, even if they were running an entire home (and I note to my satisfaction that many fewer home now operate and that although poor the adoption and I think foster rates are rising) for just one child I still don't see how you end up paying £3m a year.
I'm speculating here but maybe they built a children's home, and somebody decided to divide the cost of it by the number of people living in it this year instead of looking at the number of years it would be operating.
Recently Nick Palmer asked what's not to like about rail nationalisation. After all, the part of the operation that's in state hands already is doing SO WELL....
I read it earlier to much WTFery. He's spot on here.
"According to the figures, one council — Bexley in Kent — spent more than £58,000 a week per child — £3 million each — on specialist privately run homes last year."
Surely this merits some further detail. How do you spend £58,000 a week? I mean, even if they were running an entire home (and I note to my satisfaction that many fewer home now operate and that although poor the adoption and I think foster rates are rising) for just one child I still don't see how you end up paying £3m a year.
My guess would be that these children had substantial special needs and that these costs include the costs of the various therapists and special facilities that they require. I have seen similar costs for some severely damaged children placed in residential care.
Good on Gove, though. This is an area of neglect that society should be ashamed of and shedding light on it will help.
That sort of thing was my thought too - but the range in the diagram in that article makes me think twice before conclusing that even specialist care would require that much (it would depend on how many children there are in care in Bexley).
A quick google suggests that "On average, Independent Fostering Agencies pay a basic weekly foster care allowance and fee of £380 per week for all ages of foster children." I know that bribing potential fosters has risks, but the gulf is astounding - given that across all in care many must surely not require special treatment.
BNP Paribas Real Estate Cardiff Business School General Housing & The Economy report House prices in the UK are set to rise by a cumulative 33% between 2007 and the end of 2017, according to BNP Paribas Real Estate’s Housing & The Economy report.
i.e. 2.9% per annum. And that includes London. Quelle horreur.
"There’s no doubt now. The political narrative has been reset. In this morning’s paper, Fraser Nelson reports that a Cabinet minister who last year viewed a 2015 Tory defeat as inevitable says he can finally “see the route towards a majority in 2015”. Over at the Guardian Polly Toynbee damns Labour’s prospects with faint praise, claiming “A Labour win is still on – if alienated Tories and Lib Dems play ball”. She then adds the deadly rider “Still seven points ahead in daily YouGov polls, [it’s actually down to 4 today], the numbers point to a solid majority. But look into the eyes of Labour MPs, and that's not how it feels to them. Can you win when your leader lags so alarmingly far behind the party? Thatcher did, with Jim Callaghan miles ahead in 1979. Unpopular Ted Heath beat better-liked Harold Wilson, but all that sounds like whistling in the dark." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100235856/its-as-we-thought-in-2010-labour-is-still-in-the-wildernes/
A disabled man was asked to pay £30 to retrieve his lost wallet from a bus company. Arthur Adlam, 31, had just drawn his disability allowance and had around £225 in his wallet when he accidentally left it behind on the bus.
But his panic quickly turned to disbeleif when he was told that though his property had been handed in, it would cost him almost £30 to get it back. Father-of-four Arthur, 31, left the wallet on the seat of a Stagecoach bus in his home town of Dunfermline, Fife.
But staff at the bus station told him it was company policy to take a 12 per cent cut plus a 50p 'admin fee' - a total of £27.50 - just to get it back. Furious Mr Adlam said: 'It’s an outrage. They told me they couldn’t give it back without charging me. 'They charged me for something that doesn’t belong to them. No one should pay to get their own money back.'
Actually that's not such a bad idea if labour do adopt rail nationalisation as a policy. They will be forced to defend NR's outrageously bad performance.
"Jeremy Browne, the Crime Prevention Minister, said opening Britain’s borders to eastern Europeans was in Britain’s foreign policy interests and good for the economy."
"Asked whether Liberal Democrats would be “enthusiastic” about their arrival, Mr Browne told the New Statesman: “They’re only complying with the same rules as British people who live in Spain or have holiday houses in France, or who work in Germany.”
He said he was part of an “unfashionable minority” that “embraces the opportunities of globalisation” and does not regret the opening of Britain’s labour markets to workers from Poland and other eastern European countries in 2004. The move had improved Britain’s diplomatic relationships, he said."
"He acknowledged the incoming migrants had put pressure on public services but said "If you look at the overall ledger, the positives outweigh the negatives.""
Recently Nick Palmer asked what's not to like about rail nationalisation. After all, the part of the operation that's in state hands already is doing SO WELL....
I prefer to use proper leader ratings You found a poll to big up Maria Hutchings in Eastleigh.
I'd advise the former approach.
That would be the same poll you quote to show the alleged difference in Con M/F vote in Eastleigh when it's within MoE, isn't it?
Nope, that was the exit poll by Ashcroft which showed a huge Lib Dem lead over the Tories after Camerons ultra patronising "local mother of four" campaign
That's the one!
Had best candidate: Con: 77 Lab: 59 LibD: 85 UKIP: 46
New houses in London used to be 4x income, now they are 10x income. What has happened to the price of a basket of shopping in that time is not at the root of the London housing problem. Obviously.
Not necessarily a bubble.
Low interest rates (even at 4-5%) vs historical levels and massive international demand for P/SP make the London market just *different* the the rest of the country
"As silly suggestions go, they don't come much sillier than the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors's proposed 5 per cent house price cap."
"To take national action to deal with a problem which is largely confined to London would be wrong-headed and unfair. What's more, the sort of action proposed is unlikely to have much effect on London prices, which are being substantially driven by high levels of foreign demand.
This demand is not going to be influenced by higher capital requirements for mortgage lending and other policy tools available to the FPC. But in any case, it would be quite wrong to take action against prices in London which would further depressed what remains an impaired housing market in the regions."
Up until forty years ago the state used to spend its housing budget 10% on housing benefit, 90% of housebuilding. Now it's 90% on benefit 10% on building.
That situation has to be reversed.
Up to 40 years ago we did not have 5m+ of our fellow citizens dependent upon state payouts of various descriptions. We had far fewer pensioners, far less unemployment, far greater family structures that provided for those that were in need. It was a different and, although poorer overall, in some ways a better society.
But we are where we are. And where we are is that record numbers of people need their rent paid for them. Building more houses will not change that although it might take the steam out of any upward pressure on rents. The cheapest and best way of doing this is what Osborne is doing. We cannot afford to do any more. Hopefully we will not even have to do that.
Benefit dependency trebled under Margaret Thatcher and the housing budget started to become a benefit budget, social mobility stalled as a result largely of asset inflation which of course helps the wealthy coupled with an increasing shortage of affordable housing which distorts the economy and cripples both geographical and social mobility of labour. That has to be reversed, but you're a Tory benefit spending junky who has convinced himself that the UK housing market is somehow a free market,despite it being dependent on state control of supply and state subsidised demand, so I think you'll be one of the last to see it.
Tell me how many hundreds of thousands of rents Labour are going to stop paying to fund the building of new council houses. Without that it is just wind.
You do remember that Margaret Thatcher is dead? And left office more than 20 years ago? And that we had a Labour government for the majority of those 20 odd years?
The problem is Thatcher changed the Labour party and they can't forget it. It's why she remains their bete noire for everything.
New houses in London used to be 4x income, now they are 10x income. What has happened to the price of a basket of shopping in that time is not at the root of the London housing problem. Obviously.
Not necessarily a bubble.
Low interest rates (even at 4-5%) vs historical levels and massive international demand for P/SP make the London market just *different* the the rest of the country
Very true. (most) People don't care if millionaires mansions are increasing in London, what they care about is the two or three bed semi down the road from them which they want to move into is going up or not.
Inflation is always a personal thing to individuals, not a global/national thing.
Actually that's not such a bad idea if labour do adopt rail nationalisation as a policy. They will be forced to defend NR's outrageously bad performance.
What would happen to NR's large (and growing) debt?
It is £20 billion today, perhaps £50 billion by 2020. The borrowing is underwritten by the government, and is on top of £3.7 billion given to NR each year.
Something has to give. Labour made a series of mistakes when they formed NR - keeping it off the books, giving it responsibility for RUS, not immediately cancelling the WCML upgrade, and many others.
Most of all, we need to ask why infrastructure costs so much in this country; far more than other European countries. Land costs are one factor, but are far from the whole story.
New houses in London used to be 4x income, now they are 10x income. What has happened to the price of a basket of shopping in that time is not at the root of the London housing problem. Obviously.
Not necessarily a bubble.
Low interest rates (even at 4-5%) vs historical levels and massive international demand for P/SP make the London market just *different* the the rest of the country
Very true. (most) People don't care if millionaires mansions are increasing in London, what they care about is the two or three bed semi down the road from them which they want to move into is going up or not.
"10.25 More good news for the UK - construction output growth sped up to 2.2pc in July from June and there were signs of more expansion to come as new orders leapt in the second quarter.
In June, construction output had fallen 1.1pc on the month
New orders in the construction sector jumped nearly 20pc in the April-June period from the previous three months, boosted by housing and the building of new wind and solar farms, to show its biggest jump in four years, according to figures from the Office for National Statistics.
Annual growth of 32.8pc in construction orders was the biggest since records began in 2005."
Source: Barbour ABI
New housing leads the way. No doubt Tim will be delighted.
New houses in London used to be 4x income, now they are 10x income. What has happened to the price of a basket of shopping in that time is not at the root of the London housing problem. Obviously.
Not necessarily a bubble.
Low interest rates (even at 4-5%) vs historical levels and massive international demand for P/SP make the London market just *different* the the rest of the country
Very true. (most) People don't care if millionaires mansions are increasing in London, what they care about is the two or three bed semi down the road from them which they want to move into is going up or not.
Inflation is always a personal thing to individuals, not a global/national thing.
And outside London house prices are already rising at three times wages, and are forecast to accelerate next year and the year after when Osbornes madness kicks in fully in Jan 2014
Link? that's not my experience - they are only just clawing back to where they were before Labour's crash
"10.25 More good news for the UK - construction output growth sped up to 2.2pc in July from June and there were signs of more expansion to come as new orders leapt in the second quarter.
In June, construction output had fallen 1.1pc on the month
New orders in the construction sector jumped nearly 20pc in the April-June period from the previous three months, boosted by housing and the building of new wind and solar farms, to show its biggest jump in four years, according to figures from the Office for National Statistics.
Annual growth of 32.8pc in construction orders was the biggest since records began in 2005."
Source: Barbour ABI
New housing leads the way. No doubt Tim will be delighted.
It will be the wrong type of housing to fuel the wrong type of growth and increase the wrong type of employment.
Ha, so Hollande's landmark 75p rate is only going to be in place for two years, and footballers are exempt. What a farcical government they have in France...
To have a swing-back to the main governing party needs voters who have switched in the first place. That simply has not happened.
Well, simplistically, it looks as though both governing parties have lost voters to an opposition party, it's just that they've lost votes to different opposition parties.
Still looks like a situation ripe for swingback to me.
"10.25 More good news for the UK - construction output growth sped up to 2.2pc in July from June and there were signs of more expansion to come as new orders leapt in the second quarter.
In June, construction output had fallen 1.1pc on the month
New orders in the construction sector jumped nearly 20pc in the April-June period from the previous three months, boosted by housing and the building of new wind and solar farms, to show its biggest jump in four years, according to figures from the Office for National Statistics.
Annual growth of 32.8pc in construction orders was the biggest since records began in 2005."
Source: Barbour ABI
New housing leads the way. No doubt Tim will be delighted.
It will be the wrong type of housing to fuel the wrong type of growth and increase the wrong type of employment.
Yeah, it is all those estate agents isn't it. Oh and immigrant Polish builders. Or something.
The annual figure of increase at 32.8% is just incredible but frankly shows how flat on the floor construction was last year. Good though this is, it is no boom. At least not yet.
I read it earlier to much WTFery. He's spot on here.
"According to the figures, one council — Bexley in Kent — spent more than £58,000 a week per child — £3 million each — on specialist privately run homes last year."
Surely this merits some further detail. How do you spend £58,000 a week? I mean, even if they were running an entire home (and I note to my satisfaction that many fewer home now operate and that although poor the adoption and I think foster rates are rising) for just one child I still don't see how you end up paying £3m a year.
We've seen the govt do this before, they usually find a home that costs x amount for say 6 children, find a week when it only had one child placed in it and multiply by 52. There was a case a while back that got posted on here.
Has Gove released the dossier>
You might expect the Government to do that if it was a Labour run council but Bexley is Tory run
The one big unforeseen negative – from David Cameron’s perspective – to emerge post-2010 has, of course, been his failure to reform the boundaries. And there’s no doubt that will cost him seats in 2015. But as one Tory MP explained to me, the impact is probably being overstated. “Back in 2010 we were fighting on a very wide front. We had to win over 100 seats. In 2015 we only have to win 20”. He added: “The basic argument is 'if Cameron couldn’t win in 2010, how can he win in 2015?' But you can invert it. In 2010 we represented a gamble in the eyes of the public, Labour had the incumbency advantages and although Gordon Brown was an unpopular prime minister, he was still prime minister. This time we’re able to concentrate our resources, it’s Labour that represents the risk, and you can’t find a voter who thinks Ed Miliband has what it takes to work in the Downing Street canteen, never mind run the country.”
What would happen to NR's large (and growing) debt?
I dunno. The whole thing with network rail is another dreadful labour crock of sh8t. One of a vast number of booby traps that have been encountered since Byrne said there's no money left.
Sky News understands that the syndicate of banks - led by the major UK high street institutions - is seeking a series of concessions from the Co-Op as its overall borrowings soar to more than £1.5bn as part of a rescue plan for the mutual's banking arm.
A steering committee formed by the Co-Op's lenders has apparently made substantive progress on a new agreement with the group since it announced in June that it would be required to fill a £1.5bn capital hole at the Co-Op Bank.
The bail-out plan will involve the Co-Op Group contributing £500m to the bank, with bondholders suffering a further hit of about £500m on the value of their investments. Under the proposals, the Co-Op Group's overall indebtedness is expected to increase from about £1.2bn at the half-year stage to well over £1.5bn, a level of debt which has triggered concerns among some of the lenders.
The Group's bank syndicate - which is led by Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland - is supportive of the new chief executive, Euan Sutherland, and his management team, but is understood to be keen to secure additional protection for its credit positions.
It also wants Mr Sutherland to shrink the Co-Op Group's capital expenditure plans in order to accelerate its return to a more normal level of indebtedness once the rescue of the bank is complete, one insider said on Friday. >> http://news.sky.com/story/1141242/co-op-group-lenders-close-to-new-deal
To have a swing-back to the main governing party needs voters who have switched in the first place. That simply has not happened.
Well, simplistically, it looks as though both governing parties have lost voters to an opposition party, it's just that they've lost votes to different opposition parties.
Still looks like a situation ripe for swingback to me.
The real risk to labour isn't swingback to the tories, it's swingback to the lib dems.
Ed Miliband must be praying every day that Clegg stays as leader of the lib dems.
A must for PBers - build your own Fantasy Politics Team
"It’s that time of year again. After a glorious summer of sport and weeks of endless football transfer gossip, finally politicians are gearing up for their ‘big match’ – party conference season.
Demos is launching a ‘fantasy football’ style competition letting politicos battle it out to prove their insider know-how and political nous."
To have a swing-back to the main governing party needs voters who have switched in the first place. That simply has not happened.
Well, simplistically, it looks as though both governing parties have lost voters to an opposition party, it's just that they've lost votes to different opposition parties.
Still looks like a situation ripe for swingback to me.
The real risk to labour isn't swingback to the tories, it's swingback to the lib dems.
Ed Miliband must be praying every day that Clegg stays as leader of the lib dems.
David Cameron must be praying every day that Ed stays as leader of the Labour party.
What would happen to NR's large (and growing) debt?
I dunno. The whole thing with network rail is another dreadful labour crock of sh8t. One of a vast number of booby traps that have been encountered since Byrne said there's no money left.
Yep. At a minimum it should be put on the government's books as the NAO says, so we can truthfully see what is being spent and debate whether such spending is right.
If Labour supporters on here claim that NR is in the public sector (as they repeatedly do) then why is NR's debt off the government's books, despite the fact we guarantee the borrowing?
Another one of Brown's crazy ideas that will soon be coming home to roost.
Ed Miliband must be praying every day that Clegg stays as leader of the lib dems.
Excellent point. A new Lib dem leader would undoubtedly swing the party to the left.
Does make me wonder if Camerons best strategy would be some way of pissing off the lib dems so much they flounce out of the coalition, ditch clegg, and install Farron as leader.
High risk strategy, as without Clegg the chances of a lib/con coalition next time are small, and the risk is that any fall out from the 'divorce' would hurt the tories as well.
Still theres that euro commissioner post, isn't there?
Ed Miliband must be praying every day that Clegg stays as leader of the lib dems.
Excellent point. A new Lib dem leader would undoubtedly swing the party to the left.
Does make me wonder if Camerons best strategy would be some way of pissing off the lib dems so much they flounce out of the coalition, ditch clegg, and install Farron as leader.
High risk strategy, as without Clegg the chances of a lib/con coalition next time are small, and the risk is that any fall out from the 'divorce' would hurt the tories as well.
Still theres that euro commissioner post, isn't there?
This is exactly right. But like Lords reform -> boundaries, it's another case where his party won't let him do what he needs to do to get a majority. (Promote Clegg to the Commission that is, not piss off the LibDems.)
Ed Miliband must be praying every day that Clegg stays as leader of the lib dems.
Excellent point. A new Lib dem leader would undoubtedly swing the party to the left.
Still theres that euro commissioner post, isn't there?
The Conservatives are going to be posing as eurosceptics for the 2015 election. Making a pro-EU LD an EU commissioner would make their already weak eurosceptic credentials weaker.
Harman praises the efforts of such luminaries as Yvette Cooper , who have done so much for women.. Who can ever forget Yvettes wonderful HIPs scheme, that must have delighted a lot of women.
To have a swing-back to the main governing party needs voters who have switched in the first place. That simply has not happened.
Well, simplistically, it looks as though both governing parties have lost voters to an opposition party, it's just that they've lost votes to different opposition parties.
Still looks like a situation ripe for swingback to me.
Right, and on Rod's original by-election formulation a lot of the swing you swing back from has consisted of government voters voting for a party that isn't the main opposition.
Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 I'll debate MPs employing their own families on the taxpayer @lbc973 at 1pm.
Asked an MP to come on. He replied: "Not a f**king chance!"
I can understand that!
It's one of those things where, if you're in the position which MPs are, makes perfect sense. It's a job which requires a lot of time away from home, and a lot of travel, so having someone you trust and if you sleep with them isn't going to cause you problems is a rather sensible idea.
As long as you're not taking the tax payer for a ride, and giving them money whilst they don't do a good job...
Bullish forecast from the Construction Products Association after today's strong figures. Strong recovery predicted http://t.co/nsRixm8FFX
"A rise in house building has been augmented by increases in major infrastructure and a return to growth in schools and hospitals construction. Infrastructure new orders in the four quarters to Q2 were 19.8% higher than a year earlier and new orders for public non-housing, which primarily covers schools and hospitals, grew 12.6% over the same period.’
Actually that's not such a bad idea if labour do adopt rail nationalisation as a policy. They will be forced to defend NR's outrageously bad performance.
Railtrack was terrible, Network Rail it seems is terrible too. Are there certain businesses/utilities that are just seemingly bad no matter if they are privately or state owned ?!
That is brilliant - I did Highlight All and it was a sea of references!
I was more intrigued by the "powerful and dynamic horde" of women.
A woman's perspective would be interesting - to me it seems a slightly belittling description. They don't care about your individual achievements - just that you make up numbers in the horde.
"Auditors must tone down their criticism of Brussels spending in order to be "didactic" and morally instruct the public on the benefits of European Union membership, Herman Van Rompuy has said."
Up until forty years ago the state used to spend its housing budget 10% on housing benefit, 90% of housebuilding. Now it's 90% on benefit 10% on building.
That situation has to be reversed.
Up to 40 years ago we did not have 5m+ of our fellow citizens dependent upon state payouts of various descriptions. We had far fewer pensioners, far less unemployment, far greater family structures that provided for those that were in need. It was a different and, although poorer overall, in some ways a better society.
But we are where we are. And where we are is that record numbers of people need their rent paid for them. Building more houses will not change that although it might take the steam out of any upward pressure on rents. The cheapest and best way of doing this is what Osborne is doing. We cannot afford to do any more. Hopefully we will not even have to do that.
Benefit dependency trebled under Margaret Thatcher and the housing budget started to become a benefit budget, social mobility stalled as a result largely of asset inflation which of course helps the wealthy coupled with an increasing shortage of affordable housing which distorts the economy and cripples both geographical and social mobility of labour. That has to be reversed, but you're a Tory benefit spending junky who has convinced himself that the UK housing market is somehow a free market,despite it being dependent on state control of supply and state subsidised demand, so I think you'll be one of the last to see it.
Declining social mobility is more a feature of the post-2000 period than the pre-2000 period. Pre-2000, the average worker was seeing their income rise more or less in line with GDP. Ending rent controls helped labour mobility overall.
That is brilliant - I did Highlight All and it was a sea of references!
I was more intrigued by the "powerful and dynamic horde" of women.
A woman's perspective would be interesting - to me it seems a slightly belittling description. They don't care about your individual achievements - just that you make up numbers in the horde.
I can't abide the whole Ovaries Make You A Victim schtick from Labour and their fellow travellers. Just look at it on here - its never X has a problem with MEN - its always Wimmin who must be poor souls with no brains or backbone and unable to *understand politics*.
Random and meaby erroneous thoughs on LD-Lab battles
Labour will gain Brent Central by a landsline now Teather is retiring. Norwich South should be a comfortable gain. If they don't gain Manchester Withington and Burnley, they are not going anywhere. Bradford East can depend on the choice of candidate. East Dunbartonshire is the 6th I can see them getting.
Redcar should be a Labour seat on paper but I suspect it won't be as easy as they think. One of the steelworks reopened. It provides a good campaign theme for LD (It closed under Labour, it re-opened under LD government). 2011 locals have not been so bad for LDs. The Labour selection created some tensions in the CLP (because an AWS has been imposed to help the Progress woman from Islington regional party wanted).
I can't see Labour getting Argyl & Bute...we will never get rid of Simong Hughes...I see LD winning Leeds North West again....and I can see them hanging on Bristol West on a reduced majority...
what's left?
Edinburgh West Cambridge (independent mind LD backbencher. Labour starting from third with the same candidate as last time....uhm) Hornsey Birmingham Yardley Cardiff Central (Labour gained the Assembly seat by few votes in 2011 but with the incumbent retiring. Higher turnout will help Labour. Incumbency will help LD. 2011 was also probably the worst year for LD)
FWIW my thoughts on the above. Brent Central, Norwich South,Burnley - I'd expect comfortable Labour gains, unless Sarah Teather stands as independent in Brent or the Greens play a blinder in Norwich. I'd add Bradford East to that list as well if it wasn't for all the local factors, anything could happen there. John Leech is doing a damn good job in Withington. Odds against holding on but would be richly deserved. I see Redcar and Yardley going next - Labour favourite in both. East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West I have as 50:50. Jo Swinson and Mike Crockart will both be tough to shift. Cardiff and Hornsey would only go if Ed was heading for a majority - I make LDs favourite in both. I think Julian Huppert may be the only Lib Dem MP to increase his majority in Cambridge. If Argyll falls, it won't be to Labour.
Lib dems get a new leader that is from the left of the party and newly formed ukip voters who vote ukip in council/European elections have to decide in ed or dave for PM will go con.
Random and meaby erroneous thoughs on LD-Lab battles
Labour will gain Brent Central by a landsline now Teather is retiring. Norwich South should be a comfortable gain. If they don't gain Manchester Withington and Burnley, they are not going anywhere. Bradford East can depend on the choice of candidate. East Dunbartonshire is the 6th I can see them getting.
Redcar should be a Labour seat on paper but I suspect it won't be as easy as they think. One of the steelworks reopened. It provides a good campaign theme for LD (It closed under Labour, it re-opened under LD government). 2011 locals have not been so bad for LDs. The Labour selection created some tensions in the CLP (because an AWS has been imposed to help the Progress woman from Islington regional party wanted).
I can't see Labour getting Argyl & Bute...we will never get rid of Simong Hughes...I see LD winning Leeds North West again....and I can see them hanging on Bristol West on a reduced majority...
what's left?
Edinburgh West Cambridge (independent mind LD backbencher. Labour starting from third with the same candidate as last time....uhm) Hornsey Birmingham Yardley Cardiff Central (Labour gained the Assembly seat by few votes in 2011 but with the incumbent retiring. Higher turnout will help Labour. Incumbency will help LD. 2011 was also probably the worst year for LD)
I think Julian Huppert may be the only Lib Dem MP to increase his majority in Cambridge. If Argyll falls, it won't be to Labour.
I find it incredible that Labour selected the loose cannon that managed to finish 3rd last time - poor choice IMHO that will not put off any tactical Con voters.
Welll I guess she to make up for all that lost income from not claiming expenses (well not for herself, still keeping her daughters out of trouble on the public purse though).
"Auditors must tone down their criticism of Brussels spending in order to be "didactic" and morally instruct the public on the benefits of European Union membership, Herman Van Rompuy has said."
Well the leaders of the large countries wanted a muppet for President and that is what they got. No point in complaining now.
"Auditors must tone down their criticism of Brussels spending in order to be "didactic" and morally instruct the public on the benefits of European Union membership, Herman Van Rompuy has said."
'Mr Van Rompuy and the EU civil service is concerned that it is going to be difficult to keep track of new funding projects, worth hundreds of billions between 2014 to 2020, aimed at kick-starting the European economy.'
Hard to keep track of hundreds of billions... !Err...
Lanont criticised the SNP governmet for selling land to a guy for about GPB50000, but now the focus is why did the SLAB government sell it for GBP 1 million before the 2007 election in the first place.
Anyone betting on the Dunfermline by-election? VC and Ladbrokes have markets up, and they seem to think it's going to Labour. I wonder whether writing off the SNP here is a bit premature?
Given it was the labour SPT that sold it and guess who's husband is the chair of the SPT. Typical Labour. They never mentioned Haughey major Labour donor , he had a worthless piece of land that was revalued by Glasgow council and purchased for £16M in odd circumstances.
New houses in London used to be 4x income, now they are 10x income. What has happened to the price of a basket of shopping in that time is not at the root of the London housing problem. Obviously.
Not necessarily a bubble.
Low interest rates (even at 4-5%) vs historical levels and massive international demand for P/SP make the London market just *different* the the rest of the country
Very true. (most) People don't care if millionaires mansions are increasing in London, what they care about is the two or three bed semi down the road from them which they want to move into is going up or not.
Inflation is always a personal thing to individuals, not a global/national thing.
And outside London house prices are already rising at three times wages, and are forecast to accelerate next year and the year after when Osbornes madness kicks in fully in Jan 2014
Given wages are not rising is that a problem 3 x 0 is not a big amount
Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 I'll debate MPs employing their own families on the taxpayer @lbc973 at 1pm.
Asked an MP to come on. He replied: "Not a f**king chance!"
I can understand that!
It's one of those things where, if you're in the position which MPs are, makes perfect sense. It's a job which requires a lot of time away from home, and a lot of travel, so having someone you trust and if you sleep with them isn't going to cause you problems is a rather sensible idea.
As long as you're not taking the tax payer for a ride, and giving them money whilst they don't do a good job...
What do people think of the Farage for Sheffield Hallam rumour. Personally I think it would be brilliant. The question would be whether he could convince Tories they can't win there and trying to get people to rally round an anti-Clegg alternative. You could argue from a leftist perspective that getting rid of Clegg would be more important than getting one more Labour MP. About time Farage chose somewhere anyway.
Comments
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2419611/Network-Rail-faces-75million-fine-huge-rise-delays-despite-handed-billions-maintain-countrys-railways.html
Good on Gove, though. This is an area of neglect that society should be ashamed of and shedding light on it will help.
A quick google suggests that "On average, Independent Fostering Agencies pay a basic weekly foster care allowance and fee of £380 per week for all ages of foster children." I know that bribing potential fosters has risks, but the gulf is astounding - given that across all in care many must surely not require special treatment.
"There’s no doubt now. The political narrative has been reset. In this morning’s paper, Fraser Nelson reports that a Cabinet minister who last year viewed a 2015 Tory defeat as inevitable says he can finally “see the route towards a majority in 2015”. Over at the Guardian Polly Toynbee damns Labour’s prospects with faint praise, claiming “A Labour win is still on – if alienated Tories and Lib Dems play ball”. She then adds the deadly rider “Still seven points ahead in daily YouGov polls, [it’s actually down to 4 today], the numbers point to a solid majority. But look into the eyes of Labour MPs, and that's not how it feels to them. Can you win when your leader lags so alarmingly far behind the party? Thatcher did, with Jim Callaghan miles ahead in 1979. Unpopular Ted Heath beat better-liked Harold Wilson, but all that sounds like whistling in the dark." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100235856/its-as-we-thought-in-2010-labour-is-still-in-the-wildernes/
Actually that's not such a bad idea if labour do adopt rail nationalisation as a policy. They will be forced to defend NR's outrageously bad performance.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10306812/Romanian-and-Bulgarian-migrants-like-Britons-with-holiday-homes-says-Home-Office-minister.html
"Jeremy Browne, the Crime Prevention Minister, said opening Britain’s borders to eastern Europeans was in Britain’s foreign policy interests and good for the economy."
"Asked whether Liberal Democrats would be “enthusiastic” about their arrival, Mr Browne told the New Statesman: “They’re only complying with the same rules as British people who live in Spain or have holiday houses in France, or who work in Germany.”
He said he was part of an “unfashionable minority” that “embraces the opportunities of globalisation” and does not regret the opening of Britain’s labour markets to workers from Poland and other eastern European countries in 2004. The move had improved Britain’s diplomatic relationships, he said."
"He acknowledged the incoming migrants had put pressure on public services but said "If you look at the overall ledger, the positives outweigh the negatives.""
Had best candidate:
Con: 77
Lab: 59
LibD: 85
UKIP: 46
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2013/03/lord-ashcroft-heres-why-eastleigh-voted-the-way-it-did.html
Of course, you only fret about small base sizes when it contradicts your meme-du-jour.....
Low interest rates (even at 4-5%) vs historical levels and massive international demand for P/SP make the London market just *different* the the rest of the country
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100025535/you-dont-solve-britains-housing-problem-by-crushing-demand/
"As silly suggestions go, they don't come much sillier than the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors's proposed 5 per cent house price cap."
"To take national action to deal with a problem which is largely confined to London would be wrong-headed and unfair. What's more, the sort of action proposed is unlikely to have much effect on London prices, which are being substantially driven by high levels of foreign demand.
This demand is not going to be influenced by higher capital requirements for mortgage lending and other policy tools available to the FPC. But in any case, it would be quite wrong to take action against prices in London which would further depressed what remains an impaired housing market in the regions."
QUITE !
Low interest rates (even at 4-5%) vs historical levels and massive international demand for P/SP make the London market just *different* the the rest of the country
Very true. (most) People don't care if millionaires mansions are increasing in London, what they care about is the two or three bed semi down the road from them which they want to move into is going up or not.
Inflation is always a personal thing to individuals, not a global/national thing.
It is £20 billion today, perhaps £50 billion by 2020. The borrowing is underwritten by the government, and is on top of £3.7 billion given to NR each year.
Something has to give. Labour made a series of mistakes when they formed NR - keeping it off the books, giving it responsibility for RUS, not immediately cancelling the WCML upgrade, and many others.
Most of all, we need to ask why infrastructure costs so much in this country; far more than other European countries. Land costs are one factor, but are far from the whole story.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/jul/15/network-rail-debts-watchdog
Hits nail on head.
"10.25 More good news for the UK - construction output growth sped up to 2.2pc in July from June and there were signs of more expansion to come as new orders leapt in the second quarter.
In June, construction output had fallen 1.1pc on the month
New orders in the construction sector jumped nearly 20pc in the April-June period from the previous three months, boosted by housing and the building of new wind and solar farms, to show its biggest jump in four years, according to figures from the Office for National Statistics.
Annual growth of 32.8pc in construction orders was the biggest since records began in 2005."
Source: Barbour ABI
New housing leads the way. No doubt Tim will be delighted.
Link? that's not my experience - they are only just clawing back to where they were before Labour's crash
It will be the wrong type of housing to fuel the wrong type of growth and increase the wrong type of employment.
Still looks like a situation ripe for swingback to me.
The annual figure of increase at 32.8% is just incredible but frankly shows how flat on the floor construction was last year. Good though this is, it is no boom. At least not yet.
The one big unforeseen negative – from David Cameron’s perspective – to emerge post-2010 has, of course, been his failure to reform the boundaries. And there’s no doubt that will cost him seats in 2015. But as one Tory MP explained to me, the impact is probably being overstated. “Back in 2010 we were fighting on a very wide front. We had to win over 100 seats. In 2015 we only have to win 20”. He added: “The basic argument is 'if Cameron couldn’t win in 2010, how can he win in 2015?' But you can invert it. In 2010 we represented a gamble in the eyes of the public, Labour had the incumbency advantages and although Gordon Brown was an unpopular prime minister, he was still prime minister. This time we’re able to concentrate our resources, it’s Labour that represents the risk, and you can’t find a voter who thinks Ed Miliband has what it takes to work in the Downing Street canteen, never mind run the country.”
I dunno. The whole thing with network rail is another dreadful labour crock of sh8t. One of a vast number of booby traps that have been encountered since Byrne said there's no money left.
Sky News understands that the syndicate of banks - led by the major UK high street institutions - is seeking a series of concessions from the Co-Op as its overall borrowings soar to more than £1.5bn as part of a rescue plan for the mutual's banking arm.
A steering committee formed by the Co-Op's lenders has apparently made substantive progress on a new agreement with the group since it announced in June that it would be required to fill a £1.5bn capital hole at the Co-Op Bank.
The bail-out plan will involve the Co-Op Group contributing £500m to the bank, with bondholders suffering a further hit of about £500m on the value of their investments. Under the proposals, the Co-Op Group's overall indebtedness is expected to increase from about £1.2bn at the half-year stage to well over £1.5bn, a level of debt which has triggered concerns among some of the lenders.
The Group's bank syndicate - which is led by Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland - is supportive of the new chief executive, Euan Sutherland, and his management team, but is understood to be keen to secure additional protection for its credit positions.
It also wants Mr Sutherland to shrink the Co-Op Group's capital expenditure plans in order to accelerate its return to a more normal level of indebtedness once the rescue of the bank is complete, one insider said on Friday. >> http://news.sky.com/story/1141242/co-op-group-lenders-close-to-new-deal
Still looks like a situation ripe for swingback to me.
The real risk to labour isn't swingback to the tories, it's swingback to the lib dems.
Ed Miliband must be praying every day that Clegg stays as leader of the lib dems.
"It’s that time of year again. After a glorious summer of sport and weeks of endless football transfer gossip, finally politicians are gearing up for their ‘big match’ – party conference season.
Demos is launching a ‘fantasy football’ style competition letting politicos battle it out to prove their insider know-how and political nous."
http://demosfantasypolitics.co.uk/
Ed Miliband must be praying every day that Clegg stays as leader of the lib dems.
David Cameron must be praying every day that Ed stays as leader of the Labour party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Rail#Private_versus_public-sector_status
If Labour supporters on here claim that NR is in the public sector (as they repeatedly do) then why is NR's debt off the government's books, despite the fact we guarantee the borrowing?
Another one of Brown's crazy ideas that will soon be coming home to roost.
Excellent point. A new Lib dem leader would undoubtedly swing the party to the left.
Go to this link, hit Ctrl-F and search for 'women' in the article (so to speak) and see just how many times you can get one word in to a piece?
http://labourlist.org/2013/09/labour-will-deliver-for-women-harriet-harman-celebrates-labour-womens-conference/
High risk strategy, as without Clegg the chances of a lib/con coalition next time are small, and the risk is that any fall out from the 'divorce' would hurt the tories as well.
Still theres that euro commissioner post, isn't there?
Yes it will be interesting to see how the coalition unwinds. And interesting to see how the lib dems campaign.
'vote for us, because we're thoroughly ashamed of our time in government'
Who can ever forget Yvettes wonderful HIPs scheme, that must have delighted a lot of women.
I'll debate MPs employing their own families on the taxpayer @lbc973 at 1pm.
Asked an MP to come on. He replied: "Not a f**king chance!"
Still looks like a situation ripe for swingback to me.
Right, and on Rod's original by-election formulation a lot of the swing you swing back from has consisted of government voters voting for a party that isn't the main opposition.
It's one of those things where, if you're in the position which MPs are, makes perfect sense. It's a job which requires a lot of time away from home, and a lot of travel, so having someone you trust and if you sleep with them isn't going to cause you problems is a rather sensible idea.
As long as you're not taking the tax payer for a ride, and giving them money whilst they don't do a good job...
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes
New ComRes survey: 4 in 10 Tory MPs "unlikely" to attend Party Conference ht.ly/oQ6lF
David Smith @dsmitheconomics 10m
Bullish forecast from the Construction Products Association after today's strong figures. Strong recovery predicted http://t.co/nsRixm8FFX
"A rise in house building has been augmented by increases in major infrastructure and a return to growth in schools and hospitals construction. Infrastructure new orders in the four quarters to Q2 were 19.8% higher than a year earlier and new orders for public non-housing, which primarily covers schools and hospitals, grew 12.6% over the same period.’
A woman's perspective would be interesting - to me it seems a slightly belittling description. They don't care about your individual achievements - just that you make up numbers in the horde.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10306461/EU-auditors-must-tone-down-criticism-of-Brussels-spending-says-Herman-Van-Rompuy.html
"Auditors must tone down their criticism of Brussels spending in order to be "didactic" and morally instruct the public on the benefits of European Union membership, Herman Van Rompuy has said."
Urgh.
Brent Central, Norwich South,Burnley - I'd expect comfortable Labour gains, unless Sarah Teather stands as independent in Brent or the Greens play a blinder in Norwich.
I'd add Bradford East to that list as well if it wasn't for all the local factors, anything could happen there.
John Leech is doing a damn good job in Withington. Odds against holding on but would be richly deserved.
I see Redcar and Yardley going next - Labour favourite in both.
East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West I have as 50:50. Jo Swinson and Mike Crockart will both be tough to shift.
Cardiff and Hornsey would only go if Ed was heading for a majority - I make LDs favourite in both.
I think Julian Huppert may be the only Lib Dem MP to increase his majority in Cambridge.
If Argyll falls, it won't be to Labour.
Lib dems get a new leader that is from the left of the party and newly formed ukip voters who vote ukip in council/European elections have to decide in ed or dave for PM will go con.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24077796
Welll I guess she to make up for all that lost income from not claiming expenses (well not for herself, still keeping her daughters out of trouble on the public purse though).
Hard to keep track of hundreds of billions... !Err...
Given wages are not rising is that a problem 3 x 0 is not a big amount
Now we know. It's a conspiracy. the EU is deliberately trying to get britons to vote UKIP.
Nabavi, Plato, Fitalass et al will not be voting Labour in 2015.
Sean Fear will vote UKIP in 2015
Polls don't lie !!